This Article is devoted to the theory of “digital libertarianism”; it compares this theory with the classicalAmerican Libertarianism, as well as considers the viewpoints of its proponents and opponents onthe issues of state, law and human rights on the Internet. Unlike the modern American Libertarianism,which is largely based upon the doctrine of natural rights, the “digital libertarianism” pays more attentionto the real social phenomena, and it is closer to the sociological positivism. One of the central ideas ofthe “digital libertarianism” is the sovereignty of cyberspace, which is opposed to the state sovereignty. The state paternalists as the most vigorous critics of cyberlibertarians reject this point of view andbelieve that only state can secure the respect for behavioral rights on the Internet. The technologicaland legal aspects of cyberspace, which are stressed by cyberlibertarians, allow for users to bypass thespecified requirements, and to set their own codes of behavior. In order to enforce the law, both statewith its legal traditions and network communities in addition to the legal means of influence on users’behavior use mechanisms of material coercions. These mechanisms include a combination of specifictechnologies and legal requirements for their enforcement, which lead to the real (physical) limitationof freedom for expression and information, as well as to the limitation of privacy rights, and thus ensurethe possibility for the state or self-regulating communities to secure the public and private interests.